If I hadn't been actively seeking one of these for the past 6 mos. I probably wouldn't have paid much attention--But--This 09 S VDB offered in the Heritage auction-- http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=210083&Lot_No=24005#photo --seems to have a different S position than the 4 generally accepted. See-- http://www.cointalk.com/t78043/ It is obviously much lower than the 9's as in #4, but seems to me to be tilted so much to the right that it intersects the 0. Not vertical as in #4. Is this a new variety or am I looking at it wrong, or is this a fake? Other standard markers seem to hold true. Of course the condition of the slab doesn't help much. Sorry about the rant--just frustrated I guess.
http://coins.about.com/od/coingrading/ig/Fake-PCGS-Slab-Diagnostics/ The 1909 S VDB would be a prime coin to turn up in a fake slab. Best wishes, Peter Anthony http://www.pandacollector.com/
I think you are over reading both the example and Heritage's picture. First in the example, the horizontal line is not quite true to the date. It is actually slightly low on the right making the "S" look more vertical that it really is. Also, the vertical line should be slightly more slanted than shown in the picture. Secondly, on Heritage's picture, the date is canted to the right making the "S" look more slanted than it truly is. I am pretty sure that if you were to correct the alignment and then overlay them, they would be identical. On top if that, if there is anyone who knows as much as PCGS about such things, it is Heritage. A assure you that if for some weird reason you could show that they did make a mistake, they would make it good very expeditiously.
Thanks rlm. Thought I was going crazy (err--crazier). You're probably right. Photo angles make quite a difference.
I think the slab is tilted just a tad, which has tilted the coin, which makes the "S" mint mark look a little funky and out of position.
